Total posts: 3,052
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
@3RU7AL
@Snoopy
Faith in science is the belief that science is the best way to discover what is true and what is false.
I call that faith because we cannot know that science - as we understand it - is always going to work as a means of discovering truth. If there is a god then one day we might come to an end of what we can learn about, say, the origin of life because life is a 'divine miracle'. But if one has faith in science you don't think that will ever happen. We might come up against a brick wall because of our mental limitations, but not because 'a miracle happened'. If I knew we would never find a real miracle it would not be 'faith'.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
No you have gone off the phrase ['moderate'] simply because the evidence that I have shown you indicates if not proves there isn't any such thing as "moderate Islam" or a "moderate muslim" to my knowledge.
Don't be so arrogant! It was the Safraz Manzoor radio documentary that made me question the usefulness of the term - the radio show one you didn't want to listen to. Here's the link if you've changed you mind.
I promise you won't be disappointed and I recommend it to everyone active on this thread.
Now my stuff about fundamentalist christians was not intended to show Christianity was as bad as Islam or anything like that. I think some posters are on the wrong tack there because there is a big diffrence between Islamic society and 'Christian' society and of course the Islamic
system is worse! My point is that it's not really a difference between Christianity and Islam - its the difference between theocracy and secularism. I think a Christian theocracy - such as an imaginary US ruled by fundamentalists - would be just like an Islamic theocracy. I don't agree with Stephen about much, but I agree that homophobic (etc) elements of the OT are a red herring in this context.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
If someone says 'I'm a solipsist'. who are they talking to?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
The most important thing I know?C++
I think there are other things that are life-threatening to forget - such as how to breathe and the wife's birthday, not necessarily in that order.
Created:
Posted in:
Some people object to teleporting because it is less a mode of transport than a suicide machine.
I, however, am a totally pro-teleport! I'll discuss is with anyone who cares to. It's a given that its an impractical fantasy...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Sounds a lot like shut me up or cover something up you don't want exposed.
Sounds a lot like you want a free hand and to be unchallenged! This is a debating site, not a soap box or a pulpit - more a bear pit!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
Is there no problem in 'determining the weight'? I think its not worth stating that one should give more credence to something with good evidence than to something with little or no evidence. Well, duh! The problem is evaluting the quality of the evidence.After determining the weight of the evidence for and against the claim, it's more rational to believe the claim if the evidence is more for it than against it, and it's more rational to disbelieve the claim if there's more evidence against it than for it.
How good is something in the Bible as evidence? Is it more or less than something in, say, Josephus? Our experience of the world is that people don't come back from bein dead - is that good evidence the Lazarus story is fiction?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
If we focus on homosexuality is there a rational reason to consider it bad, or 'evil'?
It is a fact that animals (and we are animals) do not have an instinct (or drive/urge?) to reproduce or to 'preserve the species'. What we have is an urge to copulate and to orgasm. I doubt many species know that they do sex to make babies... they just feel a need to screw.
Obviously for efficiency critters evolve over time to usually favour screwing between sexes, but individuals do turn up that are more attracted to their own sex.
I see no reason why such individuals should be vilified or punished.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I have given my opinion on that score [i.e. what to do] many times to you and you simply ignored it.
I confess to not recalling what you recommended. But even if I did, there might be someone following this thread who doesn't know what you think should be done so you might care to repeat it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Would a so called "moderate muslim" call for the death penatlty for anyone performing homosexual acts? YES or NO?
The problem is your insistence that the answer is yes or no. Sometimes things just aren't that simple, are they?
Are most Muslims in the UK calling for the death penalty for homosexual acts? As far as I know they aren't. Many might support or not protest against - such a thing but that isn't the same as actually calling for it. So is a moderate Muslim one that is against the death penalty, or one that is indifferent about it, or a passive supporter of it, or actively calling for it? We can assume a muslim that takes it on himself to kill gays is not a moderate, but if it's clear what is not a 'moderate' its not clear what is.
For different reasons, Stephen and I don't like the word 'moderate'. I've gone off it recently because it doesn't have a clear meaning. I think Stephen doesn't like it because it implies there could be an 'acceptable face of islam' different from the demonised bogeyman he promotes.
You keep trying don't you, but it doesn't work no matter how many times you try to contextualise ancient 7th century Islam with 21st century Christianity
My intent was to illustrate the difference between cultures. I think that if people try to imagine the US being run by insane fundamentalist evangelicals they will get a good idea of how different the Islamic world is from what we are familiar with. In my view the diference isn't because Islam is intrinsically different from Christianity but because theocracy is different from secularism.
Created:
Posted in:
We instead would say, "He who is without sin cast the first stone"
So if - by chance - a sinless person did cast the first stone it becomes ok to join in? I don't think is what is meant. I think it is intended to block the possibility of a stoning ever actually happening.
It is absurd to suppose that something good or desirable should be blocked, so the capital punishment of gays and adulterers is neither good nor desirable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Ah ha!...So you admit we should be a bit paranoid. What are you hiding?Dear lord. Don’t be so paranoid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
There are no new vices and every sin that worries you so much has been happening since the beginning. There is just less hypocrisy now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
This is part of why what we teach becomes harder and harder to understand. Language is being perverted in such a way as to create a disconnect between the present and the past.
Heere bigynneth the Knyghtes Tale
Whilom, as olde stories tellen us,
Ther was a duc that highte Theseus;
Of Atthenes he was lord and governour,
And in his tyme swich a conquerour,
5 That gretter was ther noon under the sonne.
Ful many a riche contree hadde he wonne,
What with his wysdom and his chivalrie;
He conquered al the regne of Femenye,
That whilom was ycleped Scithia,
10 And weddede the queene Ypolita,
And broghte hir hoom with hym in his contree,
With muchel glorie and greet solempnytee,
And eek hir yonge suster Emelye.
(Chaucer-Cantebury Tales)
Language moves on... getteth thee o'er it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Wait, who reported this OP to the mods? Lmao.
Not me, anyway. I think your OP was a little gem and my post merely gilded the lily...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@3RU7AL
@TheRealNihilist
Would a so called "moderate muslim" call for the death penatlty for anyone performing homsexual acts?
There remains a step in between knowing that one's religion disapproves of homosexual acts and calling for the death penalty to be implemented. Presumably many Christians know the verse
"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." (Lev 20:13) is in the bible but they don't call for the death penalty for gays. But perhaps if Christian fundamentalists gain power that will be the law.
The problem is that in much of the Muslim world fundamentalists do have political power.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm asking you to convince me that there's a practical difference between "atheist" and "agnostic".
I'm not going near that as long as the word 'practical' is in there!
But in the meantime here's the story of the invention of the word 'agnostic' by TH Huxley around 1889.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
If there were three boxes on a form, I wonder how many agnostics would tick the atheist box because they think of themselves as 'de facto atheists'!If you're not a theist, then you're a de facto atheist.
I suppose one could argue that the a-prefix means it's a binary thing, but wikipedia has a page on that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I just watched it again and I wouldn't say that episode got 'religious tolerance' right, but I think it did a fair job of portraying religious fanaticism. I suppose it did get relgious tolerance right in that it didn't extend tolerance to fanaticism, but things were left very unresolved at the end.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
Does it need to be complicated?
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1737/post_links/94006 (my post #65 just above!)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
There are people who believe gods exist, people who believe gods don't exist and people who are uncertain if gods exist.
I've never seen a good reason for not using 'atheists', 'theists' and 'agnostics' for those groups.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
@3RU7AL
It seems we've spent a lot of time on what theism and atheism meam but not enough on what scepticism is.
I'd say scepticism is a close brother of agnosticism. It's not a position of positive disbelief but of uncertainty. If I am sceptical of ESP I shouldn't say 'esp is nonsense'; I should say 'esp is unproven', with the implication I have very strong doubts about esp being real.
So I don't agree with atheism=scepticism. For me scepticism=agnosticism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
That's the point - Tuvix makes it clear he doesn't want to be split but Janeway forces him to accept her decision anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
There's any number of ways the story could have been written... I think the one they went with was 'an interesting choice' because it did avoid the usual 'happy ending'. I think it's not obvious that Janewas decision was the right one.
My feeling is that Tuvoc and Neelix were killed in the transporter accident and Tuvix is a person in his own right. It complicates simple utilitarianism because arithmetic would seem to imply two lives are better than one (so Janeway's decision was right), but does that mean its ok to kill some to harvest their organs if that saves >1 person? To bring that even closer tothe tuvix screario, suppose the one person was the child of the two?
I'm not sure,but I think Inwould have decided in Tuvic's favour.
It's a counterpoint to TOS 'The enemy within' when Kirk is split into a 'good kirk' and a 'bad kirk'. There doesn't seem to be any strong feeling that re-joing the two isn't the right thing to do, although 'bad kirk' wants to maintain his independent existence.
Created:
Posted in:
Whether you are a racist and whether I am a 'libtard' is neither here nor there.
Given there is a social issue to be addressed, the important thing is what to do about it.
I think the content and tone of your posts exaggerates, exacerbates and misreprents the issues. I'm sure even you would not claim that you strive for balance in you posts on Islam!
I deny that I post apologies for Islam. I think that 'Islam' does present a challege to 'British values' (scare quotes because they are short terms for complicated concepts and I want to move on!). But I think that to solve a problem you have to de-policitise it and be as objective as possible.
Because in my opinion you post one-sided polemics I have to criticise what you say because your stuff is not de-politicised and objective. I think you are - by intention or inadvetently only you know - fanning the flames, so I try to put some sand on top! That's not because I love Islam or don't see the problem it's because I think you are -in a very small way because your audience here is tiny and not very receptive - making things worse using a 'tabloid' approach to a 'broadsheet' problem!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Its because the orgy was only a symptom of the real crime which was to abandon the worship of yhwh, replacing it with bull worship. Bull worship involved idolatry of a golden calf and acting ouit the bulls sexual function and nature. It was the apostasy, not the sex, that upset Moses.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I watched it again today and it is unusual in being quite 'edgy' and avoiding a tv cliche feel-good and neat ending.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't know if you know the 'voyager' episode.
It's def. not suicide!
I think Janeway made the wrong call morally, but as wikipedia says, "his fate was in fact ultimately determined not by his arguments or the decision of the captain, but by the ensemble casting and contractual arrangements" of the show". But when did Hollywood ever put money brefore ethics?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
(Yeah, mostly looking for Keith and SM to give their take on this.)
Well,it seems to all hang on the validity of p2 anf p3.
P2: If God was evil then alcohol would not exist.
P3: If God was good then hangovers would not exist.
P2 implies that alcohol is good.
Eccles 9:7 "Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for God has already approved what you do."
If god approves, who am I to disagree?
But Eph 5:18 gives "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit,"
Which, I am sure, means it's better to drink spirits than wine, unless you want to go to debauchery, wherever that is.
So, having proven from scripture that alcohol is indeed from our beloved good God, how to explain hangovers?
1 Peter 5:10 "And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace,who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you."
Praise the Lord!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
"Calling me racist is not going to cure the problem of there being more radicals than the "tiny few" apologist like you want to admit. There are millions of muslim radicals that support the muslim extreme terrorist."
Can we have some definiteness and precision about 'millions' and 'support'? How many Muslims support the Sri Lanka attacks, for example and i what way do they support it?
I think the answer is 'disturbingly many'. The interesting question is why there is support for Islamic terror. AFAICT your theory is that Muslims are members of a vast consiracy to take over the world (starting with Savile Town and Bradford). I don't go for that...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
Britain is well known for NOT having a written constiution! I'm not sure how one would help..
Created:
Posted in:
I am not sure that conditions in the ME are very significant for the UK's domestic social situation that vexes Stephen. The US has it's own problems, but in the UK the problem under discussion is a growing schism between the indigenous population and the small - but not insignificant and growing - Muslim commmunity. The right raise the spectre of a complete transformation of the British way of life, due to Muslim immigration and high birth rate.
The right contends that 'do nothingism' and appeasement will result in the dhimmitdue of the British people in an Islamic state.
So are they correct? Or is this is the one fight the racists think they can win?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I am of the opinion that a mistake people made in the old days was to think xenophobia was only ever race-based. It's obvious why that was - the biggest problem was literally black and white.
The present situation shows that xenophobia can exist in other forms. It should have been realised long ago - we had plenty of examples of xenophobia that were not racial - ant-semitism, sectarian violence between RCs an protestants, Shia v Sunni, Tutsis anf Hutus, Serbs and Croats...
Nonetheless, most oppbrobium is attached to 'racial xenophobia' or 'racism'. Therefore anti-moslem xenophobes take great pains to avoid being labelled 'racists', but the mind-set of many 'islamophobes' is the same as that of a racist and in many cases islamophobia is a thin layer or fig-leaf over good old fashioned race hate. There is a big over-lap between islamophobes and un-reconsituted racist and anti-immigrant groups.
The big issue is whether this time round the xenophobes might have a point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@disgusted
Isn't it the case that Christianity and Judaism haven't changed - it is only that they have become increasingly ignored and irrelevant due to secularism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
@Stephen
What you have proposed simply flies in the face of what muslims ACTUALLY believe about the " derogatory and insulting" term "moderate muslims" and this is nothing more than you, again, trying to tell us what Islam is and what muslims think and believe. So fk you again prosser.
The [Muslim] men and women I met told me they found it infuriating that they could be devout in their practice of their religion but they would only be considered “moderate” Muslims – since moderate was often taken to mean not hugely observant. Meanwhile those who had committed appalling acts of terror – and who were often far from religious in their earlier lives – would immediately be considered “real” or “full” Muslims. It was surprising to find a term that I had always assumed was favourable and benign being so roundly condemned. It may once have been useful but the phrase is no longer fit for purpose.
So 'Moderate' is taken to mean 'not hugely observant" - I think that's the same as 'half-hearted'. I believe my post is a sober exposition of the issue around the word 'moderate' and is neither pro- or anti- anything; I just presented some background.
I've @'ed yassine in the hope of getting his perspective.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
If I were to ask a christian should the followings and tenets laid out in the bible be obeyed, the answer would probably yes.But what does this mean? There are many passages in the bible considered to be archaic. Does the christian mean that shellfish should not be eaten, mixed fabrics should not be worn and women should be submissive? Probably not. The christian probably refers to what he/she believes are the sensible passages.
The difference is that in Christian societies is that the bible is not the ultimate authority. That is to say laws don't have to be justified by reference to scripture, and laws can (and do) contradict scripture. But the Islamic system is theocratic which means law must conform to and never contradict scripture.
note I say 'law' not belief. What is in the quran does not only affect how an inividual Muslim feels about eating shellfish. In a theocratic system scripture dictates social policy, education policy, health policy, gender policy etc. In the west we can debate, for example, the death penalty. In a theocracy there is no debate - there are just religious scholars poring over ancient tomes imposing their learned opinions.
In the west we are so used to democracy and secularism its hard to imagine theocracy. The real contrast is not between Christianity and Islam but between secularism and theocracy. There are theocratically-minded Christians in the west, and they have a small political effect. But if you imagine a US ruled by fundamentalist evangelicals with no oppostion you get some idea of theocracy.
Europe cast off the shackes of theocracy centuies ago. i believe the Islamic world can reform too, but I think Wahaabists and like-minded Muslim theocrats are a real threat who are rolling back the work of modernising Muslims such as Attaurk in Turkey.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I think a good way to understand it is that Muslims interpret 'moderate' as 'half-hearted'. Many Muslims take their religion seriously and don't like being called 'half-hearted Muslims' just because they don't blow up buses.
I imagine Stephen wouldn't like me calling him a 'half-hearted Englishman'! Of course 'moderate' doesn't mean 'half-hearted' when a westerner uses the word 'moderate', but it does come over that way to Muslims, presumably for some obscure cultural or linguistic reason.
That isn't 'aplogetics' - that is objective analysis of a misunderstanding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
That's beyond the limit of my imagination, I'm sorry to say!So if you would stretch your mind a bit (not that you haven't), giving the creation account the benefit of the doubt
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
What I said might be obvious - but it contradicts what you said!
You posted "it was simply to prove himself who was boss , who had more influence and power of the two", implying it was about which of god and satan ('the two') was the more powerful.
IMO, Job is not about that at all!
Also you asked "Why wasn't the wager about converting a sinner to the path of righteousness.?" Well, my answer is (as above):
"It has to be borne in mind that the Hebrew god was not the 'god of love' of Christianity but a god of power. He was dangerous - you wanted to keep him 'on side' because then he would make sure your enemies were defeated and disasters were averted, but He was under no compulsion to be nice.
He had to be constantly bribed with sacrifices, worship and obedience or his power would be turned against you. As a leader, he was Idi Amin, not Ghandi."
If you don't want obvious answers, don't ask stupid questions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
No, it was simply to prove himself who was boss , who had more influence and power of the two. It was a fkn wager at the end of the day not a lesson in how to pick yourself up and brush yourself off after losing everything you own and all you children.
Do you seriously propose the writer of Job only wanted to tell a funny story about God and Satan having a bet one day? It is most deinitely a lesson in how no matter what a good yhwhist should not give up their faith in God's greatness.
It is about who is boss, but not between God and Satan but between God and Man - and the answer given is most definitely 'God'. God doesn't explain or justify his actions to Job - he doesn't have to. When Job asks, God puts him in hisplace and spends chapters 38,39,40 and 41 listing all the powers He has that Job does not.
It has to be borne in mind that the Hebrew god was not the 'god of love' of Christianity but a god of power. He was dangerous - you wanted to keep him 'on side' because then he would make sure your enemies were defeated and disasters were averted, but He was under no compulsion to be nice.
He had to be constantly bribed with sacrifices, worship and obedience or his power would be turned against you. As a leader, he was Idi Amin, not Ghandi.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Flip a penny 100,000 times, and it is a near certainty you will get 10 heads in a row somewhere.
its about 50:50 you'll get 10 heads in a row in less than 2000 throws. I'd expect about 50 seperate rows of 10 heads in 100,000 throws - and about 100 for rows of 10 heads or 10 tails.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
I now think that voyager may be the best overall, based on consistency.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
I wonder if they are for defence against Pakistan or China... either way having good conventional air defence could just encourage an enemy to make a nuclear first strike.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
Do you mean orthodox or reform goosism? I believe they disagree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Shapiro's use of statistics is misleading and he is not to be trusted
No one is to be trusted when an issue becomes politicised.
It's probably true that very few muslims are likely to plant bombs or lynch gays it is almost as wrong to imagine most muslims are fully liberal and progressive as it would be to imagine most Creationists or Amish are liberal and progressive. As I have said repeatedly - but stephen misses it - there is a problem because a dangerous conservative form of Islam is becoming increasingly dominant and influential. Wahaabist Islam normalises homophobia and misogyny. It explicitly idealises an imaginary past that defines morality as conforming to a narrow and literalist interpretation of scripture.
While not every Muslim is explicitly wahaabist, the influence of wahaabism has pushed islam towards conservatism and away from liberalism. A genrtation ago a moderate muslim was liberal and progressive - now it just means they are not a potential suicide bomber.
I am not saying every muslim is a terrorist or a potential terrorist, but the bulk of Muslims are less liberal and less progresive than the bulk of westerners.
Why I am opposed to Stephen is what to do about it. I think he sees this as an opprtunity to get rid of brown people! I see it as requiring finding a way to change the mindset of British muslims - and ideally, muslims everywhere.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
In PL satan takes on the form of a serpent in order to trick adam and Eve.
The Serpent sleeping, in whose mazie foulds
To hide me, and the dark intent I bring.
O foul descent! that I who erst contended
With Gods to sit the highest, am now constraind
Into a Beast, and mixt with bestial slime,
This essence to incarnate and imbrute,
That to the hight of Deitie aspir’d;
But what will not Ambition and Revenge
Descend to?
(Book 2, lines 161 etc).
But that isn't biblical.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
It's not my area of expertise. Most sources I've checked put the destruction of the towns 2000-2300 bce and the Hebrew occuption of Israel (or Joshua's invasion) around 1250 BCE. I'm not qualified to comment further.
Created: